In an era of rising consumer frustration over repair costs and corporate control, the right-to-repair movement is gaining unprecedented bipartisan traction across the United States, challenging manufacturers' dominance over fixing everything from smartphones to farm equipment. What began as a niche advocacy effort has evolved into a populist wave, with states enacting laws and federal lawmakers introducing bills to empower consumers and independent shops. Since New York State's landmark legislation in 2022, at least six other states have followed suit, and as of 2026, advocates are monitoring 57 right-to-repair bills in 22 states.
The movement addresses what critics call a 'captive' repair economy, where companies like Apple, Samsung, and John Deere use proprietary parts, software diagnostics, and restrictive policies to limit affordable fixes. Consumers, from urban smartphone users to rural farmers, report being funneled into expensive authorized services or forced to replace devices prematurely. In New York, the first state to pass comprehensive electronics repair laws, independent shops have proliferated, driving down costs. State Senator Patricia Fahy, who sponsored the 2022 bill, noted the practical impact: "There has been a rise in independent repair shops and it makes it more affordable. Fixing screens was $250 if you didn't have insurance." According to estimates, families save an average of $400 annually on electronics repairs, with early projections suggesting a 15 percent increase in repair shop employment.
Yet the path to these victories has been fraught. Fahy's original bill aimed broader, covering appliances, medical devices, and heavy equipment, but faced fierce opposition from industry giants. "We had to strip away at our own legislation. We ran into the buzzsaw immediately from John Deere and Caterpillar," Fahy said. Provisions for large equipment, home appliances, and medical devices were removed, though she has since introduced a measure to extend rights to wheelchairs. Texas's new law, effective September 1, 2026, applies to phones, laptops, and tablets but carves out exceptions for medical devices, farm equipment, and game consoles.
California, Colorado, Minnesota, Connecticut, and Oregon have also passed sweeping regulations, with Oregon's 2024 law standing out as the first to ban "parts pairing"—a manufacturer tactic that requires replacement components to sync via proprietary software. Washington joined in May 2025. In Maine, the state senate recently advanced a bill targeting electronics repairs. This legislative surge reflects a rare political consensus, uniting Republicans and Democrats against what they see as anti-consumer practices.
Politicians are weaving right-to-repair into broader affordability narratives, especially amid economic unease. A recent CNBC poll showed President Trump receiving his lowest approval ratings on the economy during his presidency. In Ohio's gubernatorial primary, underdog candidate Casey Putsch, an auto enthusiast, is pitching the issue as a core plank, despite trailing establishment favorite Vivek Ramaswamy. "A forgotten hallmark of the American Dream is to be able to build, create, and repair your own stuff," Putsch said, positioning himself as a populist voice on economic frustrations.
Tech companies' responses vary. Apple, once a vocal opponent, has softened its stance in recent years, while Samsung faces ongoing criticism for repair hurdles. Farm equipment maker John Deere insists it supports repairs but objects to state-by-state mandates. "We want farmers to be able to fix their equipment. In fact, our industry depends on it," said Denver Caldwell, Deere's vice president of aftermarket and customer support. Deere points to national agreements with the American Farm Bureau Federation, which provide farmers access to tools, information, and diagnostics. Caldwell argued that laws like New York's—requiring paper manuals, offline processes, and free or at-cost tech access—clash with the company's investments in real-time diagnostics and updates.
Deere's practices remain contentious, particularly in agricultural states. In 2025, the Federal Trade Commission sued the company, alleging it unlawfully restricted diagnostic software access to affiliated dealers, inflating repair costs and boosting Deere's multibillion-dollar parts business. The suit claimed this burdened farmers with higher expenses. Weeks ago, Deere settled a separate class-action lawsuit from farmers, agreeing to pay $99 million and grant access to diagnostic tools for up to a decade, without admitting wrongdoing.
At the federal level, the push is intensifying. Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), unlikely allies, co-sponsored the REPAIR Act, focused on automobiles. The bill would mandate that automakers share repair and maintenance data with owners, independent shops, and aftermarket makers, curbing exclusive dealership networks. Luján also introduced the Fair Repair Act, extending to appliances and electronics. "Consumers deserve options when it comes to repairs. My REPAIR Act and Fair Repair Act would do just that. It expands options that are affordable, dependable, and safe," Luján told CNBC. He emphasized that the legislation allows repairs at prices consumers can afford, not dictated by corporations.
The National Automobile Dealers Association opposes the REPAIR Act, which advanced from a House subcommittee in February 2026. NADA argues that a 2014 agreement already ensures independent mechanics access to diagnostics, calling the bill a "Trojan horse" that could enable data harvesting and sales unrelated to repairs. Supporters, including Luján, counter that the bill protects trade secrets and innovation. "My Fair Repair Act is not about stifling innovation. It gives consumers the opportunity to find the repair service that's right for them and their budget. The Fair Repair Act specifically outlines that nothing in the bill would require an original equipment manufacturer to divulge a trade secret," Luján said.
Hawley has lambasted corporate gatekeeping: "Big corporations have a history of gatekeeping basic information that belongs to car owners, effectively forcing consumers to pay a fixed price whenever their car is in the shop." He added that the REPAIR Act would end such control, enabling feasible self-repairs. The National Federation of Independent Business, the largest small business lobby, reports 89 percent of its members back right-to-repair laws, ranking it a top 2026 priority.
Experts trace the movement's roots to technological shifts. David Friedman, a law professor at Willamette University, described how software-defined products have upended ownership economics. "The historical transition from mechanical goods, such as watches, to software-defined consumer electronics has fundamentally altered the economics of ownership," Friedman said. Manufacturers bundle repairs with sales, creating closed ecosystems that pressure consumers toward costly services or obsolescence, often under warranty threats. "When every seller plays this game, and profits from captive repair, it's hard for any seller to opt out and remain competitive," he explained. Friedman views it as "comfort-class consumer populism," akin to fights against junk fees, appealing across affluent demographics and party lines.
Not everyone sees unalloyed benefits. Personal injury attorney Yosi Yahoudai, co-founder of Los Angeles-based J&Y Law, warns of safety risks. "My concern, speaking as a personal injury attorney, comes from seeing too many product liability cases," he said. From exploding pressure cookers to faulty EV batteries, DIY or independent repairs could amplify dangers, especially in secondary markets where modified used goods might fail. "Then you add in the secondary market. If you're buying a used product, what if it's been repaired multiple times and is barely holding together? How do we really know that the products we're using are still safe?" Yahoudai asked. Supporters dismiss these as overstated, arguing consumers already bear repair risks.
Tech firms like IBM are carving exceptions. In Colorado, with some of the broadest laws, IT companies backed Senate Bill 26-090 to exempt business equipment tied to critical infrastructure. "IBM supports right-to-repair policies that empower consumers while appropriately protecting cybersecurity, intellectual property and critical infrastructure," a spokesperson said. Critics call the exemptions vague, potentially undermining protections, but acknowledge the movement's inertia.
Paul Roberts, founder of SecuRepairs—a network of cybersecurity and IT advocates—frames the drive as reclaiming ownership. "The growing, bipartisan momentum behind right to repair is rooted in a simple idea: ownership," Roberts said. Historically, manufacturers provided manuals and parts, but software locks, subscriptions, and laws like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act shifted power back. "Today, companies use digital locks, software restrictions, and subscriptions to limit repairs, inflate costs, and even kill off products entirely," he noted. From bricked smartphones to shuttered services, these tactics have sparked cross-aisle backlash, fueling one of the decade's strongest consumer rights pushes.
As state laws proliferate and federal bills advance, advocates like Fahy call for national standards. "We need national legislation, this is a bipartisan issue," she said. With economic anxieties lingering and polls showing voter discontent, right-to-repair could shape 2026 elections and beyond, balancing consumer empowerment against industry concerns over safety, security, and profits. Whether it culminates in comprehensive reform or piecemeal gains, the movement underscores a fundamental question: In an age of connected devices, who truly owns what we buy?